Peasant organisations criticised the Union Budget 2021-22 on February 1, 2021, for completely disregarding the suffering and demands of the people and implying more by what was not mentioned in the Finance Minister’s speech.

The All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) said the Budget offered nothing new for the agriculture sector. It decreased the budgeted allocation from Rs 1,34,349 crore in 2020-21 to Rs 1,22,961 crore in 2021-22. This means there was an overall reduction of 8 percent in allocations towards agriculture.

“The government appears to be following a strategy of squeezing the peasantry. There are no major additional allocations in agriculture or major new schemes. The coronavirus lockdown period had seen the Indian peasant show stellar commitment to the maintenance of food security in the country. The government, however, has paid them nothing in return,” said AIKS General Secretary Hannan Mollah.

Regarding the government’s boasting of rice and wheat procurement in the last two financial years, the farmers organisation said the government had to procure more grain due to low open market prices. Nonetheless, the procurement levels were much less than requirement levels and many farmers sold their produce at low prices.

“The spending for most schemes in agriculture declined in 2020-21, and shows no promise of rise in 2021-22. For instance, in the Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yojana, the actual expenditure in 2019-20 was Rs. 2,700 crore and the budgeted expenditure for 2020-21 was Rs 4,000 crore. But the actual expenditure in 2020-21 was Rs 2,563 crore, which is lower than the actual expenditure in 2019-20,” said the AIKS in a press release.

It also condemned the claims of the central government that current Minimum Support Prices (MSP) are already 50 percent above the cost of production. Mollah said that the government considers the A2+FL cost as the cost of production and not the C2 cost as suggested by the Swaminathan Commission. Meanwhile, a majority of farmers are still outside the procurement network, and are denied access to MSPs. However, the government announced no plan on how to expand the access of farmers to procurement or MSP. In fact, its medium-term plan is to reduce procurement, which is visible through its insistence on implementing the three Farm Acts, said the AIKS.

Farmers also raised concerns about the government’s failure to pay its dues to the Food Corporation of India (FCI) over the last few years, instead forcing the FCI to borrow high-interest loans from the NSSF.

“It is welcome that the budget has announced its intent of not burdening the FCI with loans, but it has remained silent on the past dues to be paid to the FCI. Unless these dues are paid, the financial viability of the FCI will remain stressed. It also remains to be seen whether the government would meet this obligation to the FCI in 2021-22,” said the AIKS.

Moreover, the privatisation of public infrastructure such as NAFED warehouses is a part of pre-existing agreements between the FCI and Adani Logistics for building and managing silos, said farmer leaders.

Further, the Union government announced extension of the ‘Operation Greens’ scheme provides credit subsidy to promote agri-logistics to 22 perishable commodities. It is presently controlled by large agro-based companies.

However, the AIKS dismissed the budget speech’s emphasis on infrastructure development considering the actual allocations for schemes such as Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana or the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana in rural areas have been stagnant for about two years. There are no allocation revisions in this regard.

Mollah also pointed out that the Budget maintains a dead silence on land acquisition and compensation while focusing on large scale infrastructure projects through private partnerships.

“Large scale land acquisition of farm lands would be required for the highway projects announced,” he said.

Similarly, the budget also gave a raw deal to livestock farmers. The actual spending for the Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying fell from Rs. 2,706 crore in 2019-20 to Rs. 2,630 crore in 2020-21. The budgeted allocation for 2021-22 is Rs 3,057 crore, which is hardly a rise in real terms, said the AIKS.

Building this further, workers organisation Centre of Indian Trade Unions’ (CITU) General Secretary Tapan Sen said, “The lavish statement of the Minister on her government’s commitment to peoples’ well-being and livelihood does not, as usual, match with the actual allocations.”

Talking specifically about social sector and welfare related expenditures such as MNREGA, he said that the Budget drastically cut down allocation by 41 percent of what the government actually spent in 2020-21 although the rural unemployment and joblessness increased phenomenally.

In Mid-day meal, allocation was cut down by Rs 1,400 crore from what was actually spent last year. In ICDS, the allocation reduced by 30 percent compared to allocation in last year’s budget. In jobs and skill development, allocation was cut down by 35 percent compared to allocation in the last budget while Sitharaman indicated the government move to “bring down the number of Centrally Sponsored Schemes” as per the recommendation of the 15th Finance Commission.

Sen said that the Budget entirely focused on promoting “ease of doing business” for corporates and big business, both foreign and domestic, by way of easing the burden of compliance of their statutory obligations under Companies Act, and also in the matter of direct tax assessment and recovery of unpaid taxes, besides numerous exemptions on various heads.

“Promoting tax evasion by corporates with impunity has become the hallmark of the “ease of doing business policy” of the Modi Govt, which tantamount to sponsored loot of national exchequer,” said Sen.

He pointed out that while lamenting on financial crunch and low revenue generation during the pandemic period, the Finance Minister did not utter a single word about the need to recover huge accumulation of unpaid direct taxes (Corporate and Income Tax) of Rs. 10,57 lakh crore in the process of their last five year rule; of this Rs. 2.29 lakh crore tax dues are under any dispute and yet remained unrecovered. Further, during the same five-year period, the corporate tax rate was drastically slashed down for promoting better compliance.

CITU said the Budget talked about its wholesale privatization programme of mostly profit-making PSUs, while declaring closure of all loss-making PSUs, even those in core and strategic sectors like pharmaceuticals, heavy manufacturing etc.

Leaders said the entire focus is on selling the assets including land at the disposal of these PSUs, Railways, Ports etc under their programme of monetisation combined with privatisation. Even in Railways, Urban Transport, gas-pipe lines and also electricity discom sector, reforms proposed by the Govt are virtually privatization through PPP route. 

“The government appears to be in a haste in its selling spree of national assets. Rs 1.75 lakh crore is targeted to be garnered through privatization in the current fiscal,” said CITU.

Sen also alleged that the government’s “Minimum Government” programme was simply a strategy to hand over the financial sector to private hands by increasing FDI to 74 percent in the insurance sector while pushing through IPO in LIC and privatization of public sector banks after recapitalization from national exchequer. He called such measures “disastrous as well as destructive propositions.”

He also pointed out that public health infrastructure was not spared from privatisation either despite the grim experiences of the pandemic. The organisation also voiced other concerns such as the reduction in customs duty on steel semis and scrap that will severely affect the domestic steel industry, particularly the integrated steel plants, both in public and private sectors.

“In totality, the government policy continues to be destructive for the national economy as a whole. In this background the projection of 11 percent growth in 2021-22 appears to be sound bites without much substance. [Sitharaman citing] Labour Codes [to] ensure universal social security and statutory minimum wage for all is totally devoid of truth. These Codes are going to abolish all labour rights including that to even ask for social security and minimum wage and that is why the entire trade union movement has rejected forthright these Labour Codes and demanded their scrapping,” said Sen.

Overall, peasant organisations said the Budget did not provide anything for people, did nothing for addressing the severe unemployment situation, lack of direct relief to people under severe distress through income and food support.

Related:

Farmers declare chakka jam on Feb 6 on all major highways
Opposition parties to boycott President’s address to Parliament on Friday
To be food secure, India must grow its own food grains: JNU professors
Why farmers are anti-Adani
Centre’s plan to privatise PSUs an anti-people policy: AITUC

The post Budget 2021-22 disappointing: Farmers’ Unions appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“Should powerful people and institutions continue to show an inability to tolerate rebuke or criticism, we would be reduced to a country of incarcerated artists and flourishing lapdogs. If this Court believes I have crossed a line and wants to shut down my internet indefinitely, then I too will write Happy Independence Day post cards every 15th August just like my Kashmiri friends”, reads Kunal Kamra’s affidavit in response to the contempt notice issued to him on December 18, 2020.

The comedian, who is facing contempt charges for his allegedly contemptuous and scandalous tweets against the judiciary and the Supreme Court of India, has refused to apologise for the same. He said that his tweets were not aimed to diminish people’s faith in the judiciary and that there is no defence for jokes and should not be treated as reality.

LiveLaw reported that his affidavit further stated, “The suggestion that my tweets could shake the foundations of the most powerful court in the world is an over-estimation of my abilities. Just as the Supreme Court values the faith the public places in it (and seeks to protect it by the exercise of its criminal contempt jurisdiction) it should also trust the public not to form its own opinions of the court on the basis of few jokes on Twitter. The public’s faith in the judiciary is founded on the institution’s own actions, and not on any criticism or commentary about it.”  

His affidavit further draws an analogy, mentioning, “To believe any institution of power in a democracy is beyond criticism is like saying migrants need to find their way back home during an ill planned nationwide lockdown; it is irrational and undemocratic.” His affidavit also talks about the growing culture of intolerance in the country “where taking offense is seen as a fundamental right and has been elevated to the status of a much-loved national indoor sport.”

In this regard, Kamra referred to the case of comedian Munawar Faruqui and said, “We are witnessing an assault on freedom of speech and expression with comedians like Munawar Faruqui jailed for jokes they have not made and school students being interrogated for sedition. At such a time I hope this Court will display that freedom of speech and expression is a cardinal principle.”

Kamra has also said that he will respect the verdict given by the Supreme Court in the criminal contempt case against him. “Lastly, I may disagree with many decisions by many courts in many matters, but I promise this Bench that I will respect any decision that comes my way with a broad smile. I will not vilify this Bench or the Supreme Court in this matter specifically because that would actually be contempt of court”, states his affidavit.

The matter has now been adjourned for two weeks for the petitioners to file their reply to Kunal Kamra’s affidavit.  

The Supreme Court Bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan, R Subhash Reddy and MR Shah also heard cartoonist Rachita Taneja’s response to the contempt notice issued to her for her post on social media against the Supreme Court. Senior Advocate Mukul Rohtagi pointed out that “A criticism of the court is not contempt. The foundation of the Court is much stronger.”

LiveLaw reported that Justice Ashok Bhushan remarked, “We agree. But these days things are going a bit too far with everyone doing…..”. Thereafter, the court adjourned her matter for three weeks.

Related:

SC issues contempt notices to Rachita Taneja and Kunal Kamra
Stand up comic Kunal Kamra faces contempt charges for tweets
SC to decide on contempt notices against Rachita Taneja and Kunal Kamra
Kunal Kamra refuses to apologise for tweets about SC

The post Public’s faith in judiciary is founded on its own actions, not criticism: Kunal Kamra to SC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

When Raosaheb Kasbe’s Zot was published in Marathi in 1978, RSS cadres made a public bonfire of it at the Janata Party convention in Pune that year. The book presented an incisive critique of M.S. Golwalkar’s Bunch of Thoughts, the main ideological treatise of the RSS. Kasbe traced the historical roots of cultural nationalism as outlined by Golwalkar, and exposed its authoritarianism. His study of the functioning of the RSS revealed its communal blueprint, its anti-modern views and anti-democratic objectives. 

Kasbe challenged the RSS on its own turf—its interpretation of Hinduism. Through a rigorous critique of Golwalkar’s text and careful analysis of ancient texts, the scholar showed how the RSS version of Hinduism was unapologetically casteist and deeply patriarchal.

Four decades and seven editions after its first publication, Kasbe’s zestful polemic is finally available for the first time in English, published by LeftWord Books as Decoding the RSS: Its Tradition and Politics. The book has been translated by Deepak Borgave and edited by Vinutha Mallya. The introduction to the book has been written by Shamsul Islam.

In this interview, the author speaks to Vinutha Mallya about the book, and highlights the value of socialism for India.

Vinutha Mallya [VM]: Why did you write Zot?
Raosaheb Kasbe [RK]: When I was a student of MA, I read four books that sparked something in my mind. The first was Karl Marx’s [and Friedrich Engels’] The Communist Manifesto. Then I read Babasaheb Ambedkar’s Annihilation of Caste and Caste in India. After that I read M.S. Golwalkar’s Bunch of Thoughts—it left me disturbed. I decided that one day I must write about this. 

After I started teaching at Sangamner College, I began writing articles for newspapers and periodicals like Samaj Prabodhan Patrika, which was one of the best journals in Marathi. I wrote a lot for this publication. In those days, you were considered an intellectual if your writing was published in Samaj Prabodhan Patrika. My writing was noticed by Pu La Deshpande, Vasant Bapat, Vijay Tendulkar, and Kusmagraj. They wrote to me and invited me to meet them whenever possible. I went and met them all at that time. 

I had already been teaching at Sangamner College for five years when Zot, my first book, was published in 1978. My second book, Dr. Ambedkar ani Bharatiya Rajyaghatana (Ambedkar and the Indian Constitution), was released a month after that.

VM: How was the book received?
RK: There was a store in the college where the books were kept on sale. The college management consisted of many RSS people. They protested to the principal [M.V. Koundinya] and demanded that the college store stop selling the book because it portrayed the RSS in a bad light. Koundinya said that if I had written a book it must be something good. He sent them back with the advice that they should write something nice about the RSS and get it published. Then the store could sell both books.

At the Janata Party convention in Pune later that year, the problems between the old Jan Sangh and the socialists began to surface. The socialists had kept this book on sale there, along with Baba Adhav’s Sanghachi Dhongbaji (Shenanigans of the RSS). People from the RSS demanded that the book be removed. There was an outbreak of fisticuffs between the two sides. The Jan Sangh group made a bonfire of the book and burnt it in public. I found out about it only the next day in Sangamner. I was on my way to give a talk somewhere and was at the state transport bus stand when I saw a newspaper with my name in the headline, ‘Raosaheb Kasbe’s Zot burnt’.
 
After it was burnt, Zot kept making headlines in the newspapers. It received a lot of support in Maharashtra, among the socialists, communists, the Dalit Panthers, and even from the Congress. The Congress raised the matter in the state assembly as well. In fact, Indira Gandhi and Jayaprakash Narayan both condemned the book burning and said that it would not kill the ideas that were in it. The book rode on a wave of popularity. It was priced at Rs 5. Pu La Deshpande bought a hundred copies and gifted them to his visitors. Sharad Pawar, who was Maharashtra’s chief minister, also bought a hundred copies to give away. Some freedom fighters in Dhule sold the book standing by the wayside. 

Many well-wishers started telling me, out of concern, that the RSS was dangerous. I said that they wouldn’t harm me because they knew it would cause retaliation. But I received a lot of anonymous letters with threats (I didn’t have a phone connection in those days). So things kept going on like this. 

VM: You never formally joined a political organisation. Why?
RK: Who will follow its discipline? It is good to remain independent. However, I’ve been friendly with all Left parties.

When my book Ambedkar ani Marx was released at Tilak Smarak in Pune in 1985, it was a big event. S.M. Joshi, a socialist, launched it. One of the speakers was S.Y. Kolhatkar, who was a member of CPI-M’s central committee. There was Republican Party of India’s Dadasaheb Rupwate too. Ram Bapat, professor of Politics in Pune University, was also there. Former chairman of the state legislative council V.S. Page, the socialist leader Nanasaheb Gore, and the noted freedom fighter Bhausaheb Thorat, were in the audience. So I was reassured that many people were with me. But I was also aware that when a person achieves fame, it requires a balancing act. You don’t know when you’ll fall. 

VM: What is the relevance of socialism and communism now? Do they have a future?
RK: Whatever is happening here is happening in Trump’s America too. It is the same thing in Brexit England. The situation will continue like this, and the violence will go on until socialism is established. Like Marx said, the criticism of religion is the premise of all criticism. And religious criticism can end only when it becomes clear that the human being forms the core of the world. There will be no contradictions then—and the social and political systems that will work, and move forward, are those that keep the human being as their base. 

Capitalism is going through a crisis just now. [Narendra] Modi’s rise is a strong indication that India’s capitalism is in crisis, and he is here to strengthen it. The contradictions [emerging from capitalism] will become stronger one day or the other, and it will lead to an explosion. It will lead to anarchy, and movements will begin from there—with the struggles between the poor and the capitalists. It is socialism that will win this battle. But we need to create a mass movement, no? Who is thinking of a mass movement? Everybody is going behind electoral politics.

There is a lot of illiteracy and lack of discernment just now. India’s people are not yet ready for democracy. That is why in his last speech in the Constituent Assembly on November 25, 1949, Ambedkar warned the country about the social and economic inequalities in our newly formed political democracy. It was a great lecture, which won great applause. But people haven’t read all this; they are now waking up to it because there is a need. Unless economic and social equality arrives in India, nothing will change here. 

In the Left movement, people criticise Modi saying he is this and that. I say that Modi’s arrival was imminent—it was to happen. Because the Left failed to do what Marx said is the first thing to do, i.e. the premise of all criticism being religious criticism.  We did not do a diagnosis of religion and culture. This is why there are so many illusions about religion in people’s minds. We haven’t tried to dispel these illusions about religion. 
The first reason to bring in socialism is caste. But we did not initiate the anti-caste movement. It could not be done until caste converted to varga, class. 
The Naxalites are talking about it now because there are many from the Scheduled Castes in that movement. They say ‘Jai Bhim, Comrade’ today. But it should have been said 50 years ago. And, because of not paying attention to the caste system, see what happened to the communists in Bengal. The Communist Party there was seen as a bhadralok party. 

VM: Isn’t it said that there is no casteism in Bengal?
RK: This is the thing about communists—they didn’t believe that casteism existed in India. They believed that there was no caste in India, only class. That’s why they called Ambedkar a ‘bourgeois liberal’. Ambedkar raised the question in Annihilation of Caste in 1936. He asked the communists how they were going to bring the revolution, because for revolution you need class. How will you create class? Even between the poor upper caste person and poor lower caste person there is caste conflict. Had anyone thought about it?

VM: There are many misconceptions about Ambedkar and his philosophy.
RK: Ambedkar was asked by a journalist once, ‘What is your political character?’ Ambedkar responded, ‘Is this something you should ask? I am a socialist’. The journalist persisted and said there were many socialists in the Congress too, so why didn’t he join the Congress. Ambedkar replied that the socialists in the Congress were suffocating and he wanted to breathe freely in the open.

Many didn’t understand Ambedkar, including the Left parties. Madhu Limaye once asked me, ‘Was Ambedkar a socialist?’ I felt, what were people saying? They don’t at all read Ambedkar. At least read him first, I said. Later, in his Prime Movers: Role of the Individual in History, Limaye wrote 110 pages on Ambedkar. 

They used to think Ambedkar was a sectarian leader and that Gandhi was the tallest leader. But Ambedkar established the Independent Labour Party. How could he have been a sectarian leader? So one set was blinded by Gandhi and the other by Marx. But is every single word of Marx the final truth? Something would have changed, no? Like Stalin said, there is no rulebook on Marxism. It is a dynamic thought; it must keep changing. Ask any question, and Marxists pull out a book, and say, ‘No, no, Marx has said this, Engels has said that, Lenin has said this, Stalin has said that.’ They should state what they want to do.

VM: If you had written Zot now, do you think the responses would be very different and the risk too?
RK:Things are happening exactly like I’ve written in the book, isn’t it? LeftWord should have published this [the English translation] by 1980. But they thought it was a book about religion… Oh, but LeftWord didn’t exist in 1980! [Laughs]  

Courtesy: Indian Cultural Forum

The post ‘The criticism of religion is the premise of all criticism’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Earlier in the day, yesterday, December 10,  the Institute of Chartered Accountant of India (ICAI) had issued a circular refraining its members to not share or mention any negative personal views by way of an article or interview on any platform regarding demonetisation.  Anil Galgali, an RTI activist, who tweeted on the ethics behind the advisory's aim to stop criticism of note ban was also blocked by the ICAI.

As soon as the ICAI's circular was out, Anil Galgali shared the same on his twitter page shaming the move. Galgali was surprised with this kind of authoritative behaviour of the institute. Also, when he shared the circular with his followers, the post went viral and reached the ICAI, who in turn immediately blocked Galgali. A lot of Chartered Accountants also criticised the circular after Galgali's tweet.

Owing to displeasure and criticism from all the sections of the society on the social media platform, the ICAI released it's mistake and immediately removed the circular from its website. Anil Galgali says, "Demonetisation is a very difficult phase of each and everyone. First person to be consulted during such testing times are your family's Chartered Accountant. But before becoming or recognising as Chartered Accountant, the person is a resident of this country and by all means has the right to express himself/ herself.

But the ICAI has tried to take away this right from its members.

"They don't want to listen to any criticism. Probably, some politicians may have objected, as they are advised by their CAs on how to manage stashed illegal funds. Instead of heeding to fair criticism, ICAI resorts to crushing it," an indignant Galgali react. Anil Galgali wondered whether the so-called advisory would still be effective after its erasure from the ICAI site.
 

The post To stop Criticism of Note Ban, ICAI blocked Anil Galgali’s Account appeared first on SabrangIndia.